Kit Revisions (Rangers)

[Demivrgvs]

I can also think of a good many BG2 fights that cram you into tiny spaces. If we can make up some excuse to give the archer a spell / ability that shoves an enemy away, would that help balance the positional issues you mentioned? Being a ranger, even an ankle snare type ability would be fitting.

With SR they get, Gust of Wind, KR gives them Snare. With KR making it immune to Entangle even that vanilla spell is especially good for him imo.

 

Called Shots can be used for similar purposes too, and we can easily slightly edit them.

 

The other approach could be to make the archer's glass-cannon-ness even greater, allowing it to be the undisputed champion of bows at high levels (meaning there is no way a fighter should be able to match up with a bow). Increased critical hit rate, adding alternate damage types, bleeding side effects, etc. are all options to consider, IMO.

I was considering them indeed, except alternate dmg types, unless you mean allowing them to infuse arrows with some divine spell. Even then I do not see PnP spells doing that, thus it would be limited to HLAs I think.

 

Regarding the Archer being almost OP for BG1 I agree with Kreso that the game itself favor ranged combat too much at low levels (IR already tried to rectify this a bit by reducing bow's apr), but the original BG1 had no Archer kit, which arguably makes that even more noticeable with its thac0/dmg bonuses. I'll think about it a bit more, but I don't know what can be done about it.

 

Otoh I'm really not worried about the late game potential instead. I remember an old run of mine where charname Archer dominated the battlefield (and party's kill %) even for late SoA/ToB, and the current Archer is even more versatile imo with better spells and improved Called Shots. Obviously this is a good example of a class that work extremely better when part of a party, where he can rain death from afar while a tank cover him.

[spanyam]

With SR they get, Gust of Wind, KR gives them Snare. With KR making it immune to Entangle even that vanilla spell is especially good for him imo.

 

Called Shots can be used for similar purposes too, and we can easily slightly edit them.

I didn't realize about gust of wind actually. That can work. Also, can you point me to which snare ability you referring to? I don't see it in the kit descriptions.

 

I was considering them indeed, except alternate dmg types, unless you mean allowing them to infuse arrows with some divine spell. Even then I do not see PnP spells doing that, thus it would be limited to HLAs I think.

I was thinking about how it's common for archers IRL to poison their arrows or light them on fire. A sufficiently advanced archer should be able to do that to a small degree without having to rely on "magical" arrows.

 

Regarding the Archer being almost OP for BG1 I agree with Kreso that the game itself favor ranged combat too much at low levels (IR already tried to rectify this a bit by reducing bow's apr), but the original BG1 had no Archer kit, which arguably makes that even more noticeable with its thac0/dmg bonuses. I'll think about it a bit more, but I don't know what can be done about it.

What about offsetting the bonus to hit and damage with missile weapons? Right now, you get bonuses at 0, 4, 8, 12, 16. Would it make a difference if we do 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 (meaning archer doesn't start with that bonus)?

[kreso]

 

Regarding the Archer being almost OP for BG1 I agree with Kreso that the game itself favor ranged combat too much at low levels (IR already tried to rectify this a bit by reducing bow's apr), but the original BG1 had no Archer kit, which arguably makes that even more noticeable with its thac0/dmg bonuses. I'll think about it a bit more, but I don't know what can be done about it.

What about offsetting the bonus to hit and damage with missile weapons? Right now, you get bonuses at 0, 4, 8, 12, 16. Would it make a difference if we do 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 (meaning archer doesn't start with that bonus)?

 

Even in BG1, archer has an "Achilles heel" - most notable, he can't do squat against mages who use Pro Missiles (on SR install).

He may be powerful against Ogres, Gnolls etc. but a mage with a Wand of Fire can do the very same, only faster...

I don't think offseting the bonus would actually help a lot (for the first 4 levels he would be a fighter who cannot specialize in melee and is limited to leather. Oh, and has charm animal).

Giving enemies some kind of "charge" feat would, to an extent at least.

Edited October 14, 2014 by kreso

[Demivrgvs]

I didn't realize about gust of wind actually. That can work. Also, can you point me to which snare ability you referring to? I don't see it in the kit descriptions.

Yeah sorry, there's little mention of all the work that has been done to Paladin and Ranger spellbooks, I need to do something about it. Snare is a ranger-only new spell, take SR's Fire Trap and replace fire dmg with an entangle effect. It's a 2nd lvl spell, thus you get it at lvl 8.

 

I was thinking about how it's common for archers IRL to poison their arrows or light them on fire. A sufficiently advanced archer should be able to do that to a small degree without having to rely on "magical" arrows.

I was indeed thinking to give Archer something like Flaming Arrow instead of True Ranger's Blades of Fire. That being said, BG is full of magical arrows of all types, and too much stuff like that could turn the kit into an Arcane Archer.

 

I have to do some research when it comes to Rangers and Poison within FR lore. AD&D rangers in particular were sort of paladins of nature, and while I can see them using poison against monsters I don't know if their morals would let them poison humans. A true poison ability would also heavily overlap with the Assassin. Arrows with entangle, sleep, or similar effects would make much more sense imo, but I cannot promise anything about it.

 

What about offsetting the bonus to hit and damage with missile weapons? Right now, you get bonuses at 0, 4, 8, 12, 16. Would it make a difference if we do 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 (meaning archer doesn't start with that bonus)?

Without a +1 bonus at 1st level the Archer would be inferior to a True Fighter even within its specialization because it would have no advantage and tons of disadvantages (terrible melee skills, light armor, less hit points, etc.).

Edited October 14, 2014 by Demivrgvs

[n-ghost]

Uh, people irl had no reason to poison their arrows, because arrow would kill a target anyway >,>

 

If anything, they could just stick it in mud for a bit so wound would become infested.

 

And flame arrows were used mostly in torching (wooden) buildings and marking regiment targets. And they were heavier and thus flew not that far compared to regular ones.

 

Sorry for bringing up irl stuff <.<

 

I suggest making arrows to disease enemies for a change, and make fire arrow act like Spook instead of just flat fire damage. Fire is scary, duh.

Edited October 14, 2014 by n-ghost

[Jarno Mikkola]

Uh, people irl had no reason to poison their arrows, because arrow would kill a target anyway >,>

This is totally wrong, there's a very good reason to use poison, it's not to kill them though, it's to disable them, and thus make a demand for additional support that not directed at the source of attack, military strategy. AKA, you kill 3 people, they have 3 less soldiers, but you poison 3 and they actually loose 9 ... 2 to carry each one that was poisoned. But the game has to have a rule set that removes the inreallife aspects.

The fire arrows... yeah, they could be used as fear spreaders... but the way they are used in the game, the distance of travel is less than the what every bow could flung the arrows to. As you can throw axes accurately as far.

[n-ghost]

Eh, not to start a flame war or anything, but they carry off (if they do) any wounded people just as fine, poisoned or not .__. And you don't have a direct way to identify any poison right after arrow hits it's target (especially on medieval battlefield).

 

Imo poisoned arrows fit more into hired killer (i.e.: assassin) concept. They'd want to make sure that their victim died no matter what.

 

Also, poisoned darts look like a nice idea too (somehow I forgot if BG has them already).

Edited October 15, 2014 by n-ghost

[janoha]

Wild Empathy

Does not summon a wolf at level 4. Does not function at will.

 

Bestmaster

Has Find Familiar as innate. Not Animal Companion. Has Both ASI and ASIV as level 1 spells, ASII and ASV as 2nd level spells and ASIII and ASVI as 3rd level spells with ASIV as 4th level spell.

[Demivrgvs]

Wild Empathy

Does not summon a wolf at level 4. Does not function at will.

 

Bestmaster

Has Find Familiar as innate. Not Animal Companion. Has Both ASI and ASIV as level 1 spells, ASII and ASV as 2nd level spells and ASIII and ASVI as 3rd level spells with ASIV as 4th level spell.

The Beastmaster isn't even included within the uploaded build, only Kreso has tried an alpha version of it. Wild Empathy upgrade was supposed to be there instead, I don't remember why it didn't make it.

[janoha]

Well that explains that then I thought I saw some inconcistences between my version and what Kreso wrote about.. Will Beastmaster feature in the next version? (And any comments on content/ possible ETA? )

[Demivrgvs]

Well that explains that then I thought I saw some inconcistences between my version and what Kreso wrote about.. Will Beastmaster feature in the next version? (And any comments on content/ possible ETA? )

The ETA mostly depends on how much spare time I get from my girl as she tends to monopolize my free time (too often with stuff I cannot care less), I need 6-8 hours, which means it could be out tomorrow, or a few days later.

 

It will include:

- quite a few fixes to the currently available classes

- few adjustments (e.g. Barbarian's Cleave is improved and his Offensive Stance has been replaced by a Leap Attack - aka a Charge maneuver)

- a first draft of the Beastmaster (the animal companion is more problematic than I thought)

- the 4 rogues classes (True Thief, Assassin, Bounty Hunter and Swashbuckler)

[janoha]

Tracking

I think tracking needs a boost. There are many other ways to dispel invisibility and I am severely hampering my Rangers combat ability by trying to get a small chance to dispel it.

I would recommend something like 40-50% for basic tracking and maybe 75% for the upgraded tracking. This may seems high but both clerics and mages can dispel invisibility without fail and thiefs don't get movement speed penalty using Detect Illusion.

[janoha]

Stalker

I think his weapon restrictions are too strict. He should at the very least be able to use long bows in my opinion. Spears and composite long bows would also be cool.

In BG2EE I can still put proficiency points into weapons he can't use. I guess you know this, but thought I'd still mention it.

 

Edit: I like the spellcasting for the Ranger though. Many good choices that has nice synergy for him.

Edited May 1, 2015 by janoha

[Demivrgvs]

Tracking

I think tracking needs a boost. There are many other ways to dispel invisibility and I am severely hampering my Rangers combat ability by trying to get a small chance to dispel it.

I would recommend something like 40-50% for basic tracking and maybe 75% for the upgraded tracking. This may seems high but both clerics and mages can dispel invisibility without fail and thiefs don't get movement speed penalty using Detect Illusion.

Tracking already has 50%-60% chance, and 100% against the quarry. The advantage over thief's Detect Illusion is that the ranger can still fight while looking out for hidden enemies. I'm curious to hear morefeedback on this ability and its cousin, Hunter's Quarry.

 

Stalker

 

I think his weapon restrictions are too strict. He should at the very least be able to use long bows in my opinion. Spears and composite long bows would also be cool.

In BG2EE I can still put proficiency points into weapons he can't use. I guess you know this, but thought I'd still mention it.

I don't know. The stalker's stealthy approach doesn't really suggest long bows and spears imo, and gameplay wise they do not even suit the backstab mechanic. Why do you think it needs less restrictions?

 

Ranger's spellbooks

I like the spellcasting for the Ranger though. Many good choices that has nice synergy for him.

[janoha]

Tracking

I think tracking needs a boost. There are many other ways to dispel invisibility and I am severely hampering my Rangers combat ability by trying to get a small chance to dispel it.

I would recommend something like 40-50% for basic tracking and maybe 75% for the upgraded tracking. This may seems high but both clerics and mages can dispel invisibility without fail and thiefs don't get movement speed penalty using Detect Illusion.

Tracking already has 50%-60% chance, and 100% against the quarry. The advantage over thief's Detect Illusion is that the ranger can still fight while looking out for hidden enemies. I'm curious to hear morefeedback on this ability and its cousin, Hunter's Quarry.

I have a couple of issues with it. First of all, thiefs can still attack while using Detect Illusions. They just need to choose a target first, and then activate DI afterwards. Maybe not intended behaviour, but it definitely works.

While you are correct about Quarry, it is simply not enough to only work on one enemy. Most backstab situations have at least two or three backstabbers, and only revealing one through quarry+tracking still leaves you very vulnerable. In those cases you will need to use either Purge Invisibility, Detect Invisibility or similar. And if you do that, there is no point in giving up your movement speed - which is a substantial penalty in my opinion.

 

I like the concept of tracking + Hunter's Quarry but I don't think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks in its' current implementation. Increasing to 75% for the upgraded tracking would give a fair chance. With three thiefs attacking you, you would have 42% chance per round to dispel all of them (if rolls are individual?) without using Hunter's Quarry.. And activating both Hunter's Quarry and then Tracking will more often that not take so much time, that the thief can land a backstab.

 

 

Stalker

 

I think his weapon restrictions are too strict. He should at the very least be able to use long bows in my opinion. Spears and composite long bows would also be cool.

In BG2EE I can still put proficiency points into weapons he can't use. I guess you know this, but thought I'd still mention it.

I don't know. The stalker's stealthy approach doesn't really suggest long bows and spears imo, and gameplay wise they do not even suit the backstab mechanic. Why do you think it needs less restrictions?

 

I think the current restrictions are too severe. While I am definitely on board with not allowing two-handed swords, axes, flails etc. I still think that the Stalker kit is a Warrior class at its base. Leaving it with thief weapons only is a very harsh restriction. Long bows seem to me to be quintessential Ranger Weapons, and should therefore be allowed. Spears, I grant you, makes less sense theme wise. However they do sort of fall within the "light" weapon category and are currently underused.

 

 

Armor restrictions

Oh and just a thought. Did it occur to you, that all the Ranger kits are limited to Studded Leather? While I can see the case being made for each and one of them, it feels a bit strange to have the same penalty for all of them..

Edit: Unless "not wear metal armors" for Beastmaster allows armors like Ashen Scales? In that case, feel free to disregard these musings

Edited May 2, 2015 by janoha